Who nailed Him ?

[Davies]

Re: Thy Kingdom come...

The devil officially approves of this thread. Who wants to argue that point with me?

Hi Kaliani,

The ability to recognize sin isn't displayed by everyone. I see that you can.

- Davies

 

[wayseer]

I believe the Bible to be truth, therefore the burden of proof lay upon you, you claim no such custom existed yet can show no proof other than modern theory that the custom did not exist.

Read Josephus

The only way you can make this claim is to deny providential preservation of the word of God and do not belong on a Christian Forum.

If you maintain the Bible is Truth then you have to follow all the Bible and not just the bit you happen to like. Some of those 'truth' bits have to do with stoning certain people. Are you really serious that stoning should continue today? How about slavery?

Then there is command by the prophets to walk humbly before the Lord - which seems to get pushed to the background.

The inconvenient truth is that you interpret the Bible to suit your own ideology but they deny others to do the same.

The anti-Semiticism contained in the Biblical texts has more to do with the split that happened between Judaism and Christianity. This is well recognized by any number of respected scholars.

 

[wayseer]

Re: Thy Kingdom come...

The devil officially approves of this thread. Who wants to argue that point with me?

What?

 

[Hammer]

Read Josephus

Maybe you could quote the part you think is compelling for your case, rather than tell us to dig through a haystack for a needle that you say is there?

If you maintain the Bible is Truth then you have to follow all the Bible and not just the bit you happen to like. Some of those 'truth' bits have to do with stoning certain people. Are you really serious that stoning should continue today? How about slavery?

One bit of truth does not cease to be truth just because someone doesn't follow another bit of truth. By the way, you don't know what I think should continue, nor should you suspect I interpret the Bible with crassness that you employee.

The anti-Semiticism contained in the Biblical texts has more to do with the split that happened between Judaism and Christianity. This is well recognized by any number of respected scholars.

Good for the Bible.

 

[rrowell]

Read Josephus

I did, I said show me, don't tell me to read 6 or 7 books to support your claim, Give me the quote from Josephus that states your claim.

If you maintain the Bible is Truth then you have to follow all the Bible and not just the bit you happen to like. Some of those 'truth' bits have to do with stoning certain people. Are you really serious that stoning should continue today? How about slavery?

You critique something you have not read yourself, If you had you would see the Bible does not teach that people are to stone people today, and lucky for you as in the old testament he does not strike those dead who don't obey.

There are 3 ages taught in the Bible, we are in the third (A Christian would know that).

Your doing exactly what you claim others do, taking bits and pieces of the Bible and try to disprove it... you'll have to do better than that...

Then there is command by the prophets to walk humbly before the Lord - which seems to get pushed to the background.

We are not under the law of the Prophets, we are under the Law of Christ. again you show you have no knowledge of the subject you critique.

The inconvenient truth is that you interpret the Bible to suit your own ideology but they deny others to do the same.

The only inconvenience is wasting time debating with someone who has right out stated that the Bible is not all fact and made up by some religious men...

The anti-Semiticism contained in the Biblical texts has more to do with the split that happened between Judaism and Christianity. This is well recognized by any number of respected scholars.

Maybe respected by you, the devil himself was a scholar and told Eve what God really meant...

Anyone that believes the Bible is full of semantics needs to be on another forum...

The Bible is truth, you deny that... therefore you don't belong here...

For the believer the Bible is and always will be the "Inspired Word Of God"

Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Luke 16:17 (KJV)
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

 

[wayseer]

Maybe you could quote the part you think is compelling for your case, rather than tell us to dig through a haystack for a needle that you say is there?

You need to learn to look for needles in haystacks rather than being spoon fed. Try Google.

One bit of truth does not cease to be truth just because someone doesn't follow another bit of truth.

Which is the very pint I have been making.

By the way, you don't know what I think should continue, nor should you suspect I interpret the Bible with crassness that you employee.

Good.

Good for the Bible.

I take it you support anti-Semitism. You are out of step here.

 

[wayseer]

I did, I said show me, don't tell me to read 6 or 7 books to support your claim, Give me the quote from Josephus that states your claim.

Stop with the laziness and do your own research. Try Google - you'll never know what you will find.

You critique something you have not read yourself, If you had you would see the Bible does not teach that people are to stone people today, and lucky for you as in the old testament he does not strike those dead who don't obey.

So I wonder what's changed. God has not struck me dead for seriously questioning those who tell me I have to interpret the Bible a certain way.

There are 3 ages taught in the Bible, we are in the third (A Christian would know that).

New Age philosophy is another aspect of fantasy. Needless to say I don't buy simplistic theology.

Your doing exactly what you claim others do, taking bits and pieces of the Bible and try to disprove it... you'll have to do better than that...

At least I am prepared to acknowledge that is what I am doing rather than deny the fact. The real issue to remain consistent in the way you interpret the Biblical texts.

We are not under the law of the Prophets, we are under the Law of Christ. again you show you have no knowledge of the subject you critique.

Jesus said something about fulfilling at the Law and the Prophets.

The only inconvenience is wasting time debating with someone who has right out stated that the Bible is not all fact and made up by some religious men...

I have not made that assertion at all. Please read what I have said and not what you construe my words to me for your convenience.

Maybe respected by you, the devil himself was a scholar and told Eve what God really meant...

The devil is not a scholar. In the fact the devil is pretty ignorant and goes with simply and convenient responses.

Anyone that believes the Bible is full of semantics needs to be on another forum...

Why? Because I raise inconvenient facts?

The Bible is truth, you deny that... therefore you don't belong here...

Again you choose to misrepresent my words.

For the believer the Bible is and always will be the "Inspired Word Of God"

I have never suggested otherwise. What I have challenged is the perception that many claim their way is the only way.

 

[Hammer]

I take it you support anti-Semitism. You are out of step here.

I support Christianity, which is typically called anti-semitic by judaizers, which includes people who can't bring themselves to admit that the Jews killed Jesus. Christianity is anti- all false religion, which includes Talmudic Judaism.

 

[rrowell]

Stop with the laziness and do your own research. Try Google - you'll never know what you will find.

I quoted scripture that say's the Bible is truth, you claim its not, the burden of proof is on you, I am not wasting my time proving your false claim...

If you have something cough it up, or drop it... I say you have no proof otherwise... there are many like you that claim something with no proof what so ever then tell the believer to prove them wrong...

Your on a believers forum, you prove them wrong (post it if you got it) or drop it as heresy...

So I wonder what's changed. God has not struck me dead for seriously questioning those who tell me I have to interpret the Bible a certain way.

Read up on Grace, it is what he gave us (and why he doesn't do that in these last days) you still have a chance to read prayerfully to change your thinking as long as he gives you another breath...

New Age philosophy is another aspect of fantasy. Needless to say I don't buy simplistic theology.

The word of God has not changed in two thousand years, its hardly "new age", and your free to call it "fantasy" and we will all pray for you that you come to understand.

At least I am prepared to acknowledge that is what I am doing rather than deny the fact. The real issue to remain consistent in the way you interpret the Biblical texts.

The scripture was written so a child could understand:

2 Timothy 3:15 (KJV)
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

it is not the Bible that is hard to interpret, it is when man puts his own twist to it that brings about division...

Jesus said something about fulfilling at the Law and the Prophets.

Here you need to take your own advise, google "fulfilled" then you can understand why we are not under the "Law and Prophets".

I have not made that assertion at all. Please read what I have said and not what you construe my words to me for your convenience.

You have on this forum told people that are trying to live Christian lives that the Bible they read is of simple men (no inspiration (Google that too if you don't know what that means)). That my friend is an assertion.

I would be glad to have a reasonable debate with you especially if you wish to learn about this Bible you claim not to be true (as well all the others on this forum will with you). but if you insist upon calling the word of God not of truth, you need to go to one of the forums on this site where they allow such, otherwise your on the wrong forum.

The devil is not a scholar. In the fact the devil is pretty ignorant and goes with simply and convenient responses.

Ill say it again, Like scholars today, the devil told Eve what God meant:

Genesis 3:4 (KJV)
4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

He took Jesus to tempt Him, he quoted scripture (one of many examples)

Matthew 4:5-6 (KJV)
5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

The devil is a scholar, so we need to pick our scholars wisely....

 

[Hammer]

You need to learn to look for needles in haystacks rather than being spoon fed. Try Google.

You said "Read Josephus" to defend your claim that the Bible falsely presents Pilate as trying to free Jesus. The burden is on you to show the Bible, as a historical document, is wrong on this. The account of Barabbas being released is in all four Gospels. That's four First Century authors who thought this account was real. That's four people who knew Roman practices better than anyone alive today.

Okay, I read Josephus. I didn't find any claim that the Bible lies about Pilate trying to free Jesus, specially Josephus denying that Pilate would release a prisoner.

Your skepticism doesn't come from an interest in finding the truth, but an interest in rejecting the truth.

 

[ezra]

the Jews killed Jesus. Christianity is anti- all false religion, which includes Talmudic Judaism.

they rejected him Rome had him crucified...NO BODY KILLED JESUS. he gave the Ghost up after he said it is finished. thus the reason they never broke his legs to finish off the cruel punishment

 

[rrowell]

You said "Read Josephus" to defend your claim that the Bible falsely presents Pilate as trying to free Jesus. The burden is on you to show the Bible, as a historical document, is wrong on this. The account of Barabbas being released is in all four Gospels. That's four First Century authors who thought this account was real. That's four people who knew Roman practices better than anyone alive today.

Okay, I read Josephus. I didn't find any claim that the Bible lies about Pilate trying to free Jesus, specially Josephus denying that Pilate would release a prisoner.

Your skepticism doesn't come from an interest in finding the truth, but an interest in rejecting the truth.

Your correct, I didn't read Josephus, but I searched it, they always make claims and then tell Christians "prove it", the burden in on him, not us.

 

[Hammer]

they rejected him Rome had him crucified...NO BODY KILLED JESUS. he gave the Ghost up after he said it is finished. thus the reason they never broke his legs to finish off the cruel punishment

Your view contradicts the explicit word of scripture, as well as just a common sense understanding of events.

 

[Hammer]

Your correct, I didn't read Josephus, but I searched it, they always make claims and then tell Christians "prove it", the burden in on him, not us.

The anti-christian argument isn't that Josephus contradicts the Gospels' account of the tradition of a prisoner being released on Passover, but that there's no extra-biblical reference to this tradition. We have so little history before modern times that the absence of such reference is not at all a reason to doubt the historical biblical accounts. Even if there really were no such tradition, Pilate could have still claimed such a tradition existed as an excuse to get Jesus released. So, Atheist's strike out twice. They haven't refuted the evidence of such a tradition. And, even if they could refute the evidence, they still wouldn't have made their case that Pilate didn't offer to release a prisoner in an attempt to free Jesus.

In the end, Atheists just out-of-hand choose not to believe the evidence.

 

[ezra]

Your view contradicts the explicit word of scripture, as well as just a common sense understanding of events.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
31 Since it was the preparation day,k the Jews did not want the bodiesl to remain on the crossm on the Sabbathn (for that Sabbath was a specialo day). They requested that Pilate have the men’s legs broken and that their bodies be taken away.p 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first man and of the other one who had been crucified with Him. 33 When they came to Jesus, they did not break His legs since they saw that He was already dead.q 34 But one of the soldiers piercedr His sides with a spear, and at once blood and watert came out. 35 He who saw this has testifiedu so that you also may believe. His testimony is true, and he knows he is telling the truth.v 36 For these things happened so that the Scripture would be fulfilled:w Not one of His bones will be broken.xy 37 Also, another Scripture says: They will look at the One they pierced.za


Chapter 19
Jesus Flogged and Mocked
1 Then •Pilate took Jesus and had Him flogged. 2 The soldiers also twisted together a crowna of thorns, put it on His head, and threw a purple robe around Him. 3 And they repeatedly came up to Himb and said, “Hail, King of the Jews!” and were slapping His face.
4 Pilate went outside again and said to them, “Look, I’m bringing Him outside to you to let you know I find no groundsc for charging Him.”

 

[rrowell]

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
31 Since it was the preparation day,k the Jews did not want the bodiesl to remain on the crossm on the Sabbathn (for that Sabbath was a specialo day). They requested that Pilate have the men’s legs broken and that their bodies be taken away.p 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first man and of the other one who had been crucified with Him. 33 When they came to Jesus, they did not break His legs since they saw that He was already dead.q 34 But one of the soldiers piercedr His sides with a spear, and at once blood and watert came out. 35 He who saw this has testifiedu so that you also may believe. His testimony is true, and he knows he is telling the truth.v 36 For these things happened so that the Scripture would be fulfilled:w Not one of His bones will be broken.xy 37 Also, another Scripture says: They will look at the One they pierced.za


Chapter 19
Jesus Flogged and Mocked
1 Then •Pilate took Jesus and had Him flogged. 2 The soldiers also twisted together a crowna of thorns, put it on His head, and threw a purple robe around Him. 3 And they repeatedly came up to Himb and said, “Hail, King of the Jews!†and were slapping His face.
4 Pilate went outside again and said to them, “Look, I’m bringing Him outside to you to let you know I find no groundsc for charging Him.â€

they rejected him Rome had him crucified...NO BODY KILLED JESUS. he gave the Ghost up after he said it is finished. thus the reason they never broke his legs to finish off the cruel punishment

In one breath, you say Jesus was crucified, in another you say "He gave up the ghost"

Crucifixion is a "punishment to death", so by your theory, Nobody crucified Christ, He committed suicide...

The Bible says He was crucified, that means he was punished unto death... he was either crucified, or he was not... I choose to believe the Bible which said He was "crucified"....

 

[ezra]

In one breath, you say Jesus was crucified, in another you say "He gave up the ghost"

Crucifixion is a "punishment to death", so by your theory, Nobody crucified Christ, He committed suicide...

The Bible says He was crucified, that means he was punished unto death... he was either crucified, or he was not... I choose to believe the Bible which said He was "crucified"....

back up i never said he committed suicide i said he gave up the ghost. they was on the way to break his legs thus he would finish dieing by asphyxiation . his air pipe would collapse. as he could not hold him self up. he went to be with his heavenly father, you need to read the background history . it was prophesied his legs would not be broke. he did not give them the chance to finish his death. that is the reason he said IT IS FINISHED. the final payment for our sins was made upon the cross. to correct you to commit suicide .would mean to take your own life. go to exodus compare the Passover meal. it was points toward Christ.

so by your theory, Nobody crucified Christ, He committed suicide..

do me a favor please do not add to my post what i did NOT say. every thing i said is Bible

 

[wayseer]

I quoted scripture that say's the Bible is truth, you claim its not, the burden of proof is on you, I am not wasting my time proving your false claim...

What you have to do is prove that Rome had a habit of setting prisoners free. The only reference you have is the anti-Jewish sentiment contained in the Gospel. If history has no purpose then perhaps you take up stoning.

If you have something cough it up, or drop it... I say you have no proof otherwise... there are many like you that claim something with no proof what so ever then tell the believer to prove them wrong...

Cough ... cough ... how about common sense?

Your on a believers forum, you prove them wrong (post it if you got it) or drop it as heresy...

Are you suggesting we return to Hiltlerism?

Read up on Grace, it is what he gave us (and why he doesn't do that in these last days) you still have a chance to read prayerfully to change your thinking as long as he gives you another breath...

God did not give us 'grace'. We benefit from God's grace - there is a difference.

The word of God has not changed in two thousand years, its hardly "new age", and your free to call it "fantasy" and we will all pray for you that you come to understand.

It has changed considerable - particular since the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The scripture was written so a child could understand:

Children have to be taught to learn.

Here you need to take your own advise, google "fulfilled" then you can understand why we are not under the "Law and Prophets".

Interesting - I thought you insisted that the Biblical texts were 'truth'. Has no Jesus said that he fulfills the Law and The Prophets? Read again.

You have on this forum told people that are trying to live Christian lives that the Bible they read is of simple men (no inspiration (Google that too if you don't know what that means)). That my friend is an assertion.

Please read what I said and not what you think I said.

I would be glad to have a reasonable debate with you especially if you wish to learn about this Bible you claim not to be true (as well all the others on this forum will with you). but if you insist upon calling the word of God not of truth, you need to go to one of the forums on this site where they allow such, otherwise your on the wrong forum.

I have not claimed the Bible to be 'untrue'. What I have challenged is that there are those whom seem to think I have to agree what they tell me is in the Bible when clearly they have not read the Bible - but only the convenient bits to support their own ideology.

The devil is a scholar, so we need to pick our scholars wisely....

You give the devil far more credit than is warranted. If you used what God has blessed you with - a mind - then you might appreciate that there are two sides to every coin.

 

[Hammer]

What you have to do is prove that Rome had a habit of setting prisoners free. The only reference you have is the anti-Jewish sentiment contained in the Gospel. If history has no purpose then perhaps you take up stoning.

I've got four books from the First Century, three of them authored by Jews. You've got nothing, except a lame Josephus bluff. Nothing but anti-Christian sentiment.

Are you suggesting we return to Hiltlerism?

Playing the Hitler card is bad enough, but against texts written by Jews in a predominantly Jewish church is shamefully lame.

It has changed considerable - particular since the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

You're still striking out. The Dead Sea scrolls are a remarkable confirmation of how reliably the Old Testament text has been preserved.

 

[wayseer]

I've got four books from the First Century, three of them authored by Jews. You've got nothing, except a lame Josephus bluff. Nothing but anti-Christian sentiment.

What you have is your own ideology that demands that I must agree with you.

Playing the Hitler card is bad enough, but against texts written by Jews in a predominantly Jewish church is shamefully lame.

The anti-Semirism expressed by Luther was used successfully by the Nazi to promote their own destructive ideology. The Church has much to forgive - which is one reason why Popes of recent times have been concerned with asking for that forgiveness from the Jews.

You will probably need to read a little deeper.

You're still striking out. The Dead Sea scrolls are a remarkable confirmation of how reliably the Old Testament text has been preserved.

Exactly - but have a look at end of 1 Sam 11. Compare Bibles, especially the NRSV, and see what the texts say. Now you might need to ask why the difference. Yes, the DSS confirms much of the texts but is some instances there is explicit differences. Now what are you going to do? Call them forgeries - or call the Bible a forgery? They both can't be right.

The point is - there is more going on in the Biblical texts than your simple idealist interpretation. There are over 5500 extant copies of the NT texts, and none of them are original, and very few of them agree with each other. There also any number of personal agendas being promoted by the writers of those texts. And one of the most destructive personal agendas was that of anti-Semitism. Wading through that lot takes time and study. And many inconsistencies will be reveal and dealing with such matters is indeed a test of faith. But the alternative head in the sand approach won't sustain your faith in the 21st century.